Often to justify that a game is still good, or doesn't have any flaws, or that the flaws that exist need to be ignored just because it happened to be a thing at some point in time. As I've said on another set of forums I've made this thread on, I can understand the idea of using it as a historical stance. Like for example, saying the early 3D control scheme of tank controls were good for the time, as something like that would be a milestone in the genre, forever changing it from that point on. But wouldn't that be better phrased as "acceptable" or "innovative" for its time, rather than "good?" After all, something can't be good one day and bad the next, because the content is fixed (i.e. not changing, constant).
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
The "Good For Its Time" Defense
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|